George Osborne attacked Labour's "empty" budget today as the two main parties attempted to draw their political dividing lines ahead of the general election.

The shadow chancellor promised that voters would learn more details about the Conservatives' own plans for the economy before the election.

But Alistair Darling, the chancellor, said the Tories risked "tipping the country back into recession" by cutting spending too early.

Osborne attacked the government for the lack of "vision" in yesterday's budget and joined some economists who have claimed that Darling has failed to set out a credible strategy for cutting the nation's record deficit.

Osborne admitted that he was still going through the small print of the government's plans – though the Conservatives have already accused Darling of concealing a de facto tax rise for 30 million workers resulting from a freezing of tax allowance bands.

He insisted that the Conservatives intended to set out more detail on economic policy between now and election day but claimed he did not yet have all the necessary information to hand.

"There is still information out there that would be incredibly helpful," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "If I had more information available about what the actual state of affairs was it would be easier for you and I to penetrate the public finances ... You and I, like the rest of the country, are paying for this."

Osborne is waiting for analysis from the Institute for Fiscal Studies later today and also requesting details of departmental spending forecasts.

He added: "People will know what they are voting for. What we want is a mandate to deal with the largest budget deficit in the G20. We want a mandate to try and get this economy moving again. We want a mandate for a government of energy and vision and ideas that is actually going to tackle the big economic problems that the country faces, rather than the kind of empty budget you got yesterday."

Darling's budget drew up the battle lines for a general election expected on 6 May by squeezing the better-off to fund help for new home-buyers, the elderly and the young unemployed.

In his final parliamentary setpiece before the country goes to the polls, the chancellor said he was determined that those who did well in the good years "should now pay their fair share of tax".

But Osborne said Darling was "not being straight with people" over the personal allowances row.

The Conservatives have warned that tens of millions of ordinary workers will be hit by a de facto tax increase due to the freezing of personal allowances, despite a 3.7% retail price inflation rate.

Defending the measure, Darling said the personal allowance bands were frozen because they were set at a time of negative inflation, in September. He said that increasing them, as the Tories have suggested, would cost £2bn.

"If that really is their policy they need to say where the money is coming from," the chancellor told GMTV.

In a separate interview on Sky News, Osborne said: "He has frozen the personal income tax allowance. That is an effective tax rise on 30 million working people, because when he said he was going to freeze it last autumn, inflation was negative. Now inflation is 3.7% on the RPI.

"What that means, in effect, is a tax rise for millions of working people and, if you're someone on the basic rate, that's around £50 extra tax a year; if you're a couple, around £100 extra tax a year. And of course that's not including the national insurance tax on people's incomes which is coming down the track."

Asked if he would have raised the personal allowances, Osborne added: "I would have got to grips with the waste, the bloat, the excessive spending that got Britain into the problem it faces today.

"I would have set out a credible plan to deal with the debts that would have protected our country's credit rating, kept interest rates lower for longer, and avoided the ever-increasing spiral of taxes which seem to come from this government to working people."

Asked if he would raise taxes, including VAT, he said: "No chancellor or shadow chancellor, including Alistair Darling or indeed Gordon Brown before him, would ever rule out tax rises in the future – that would be a totally irresponsible thing to do.

"What I am saying to you is telling you about my priorities and values, which are about trying to avoid tax rises on working people by dealing with bloated government waste that has caused this debt problem, that threatens higher interest rates, that costs jobs, and puts taxes up on working people."

He said his first priority was to avoid the 1% rise in national insurance announced before this budget and due to take effect in April 2011.

Asked when he would have his own budget if the Tories win the election and he becomes chancellor, Osborne said: "We'd have it within 50 days of the election."

The centrepiece of Darling's statement was a two-year stamp duty holiday for first-time home-buyers on properties up to £250,000, paid for by a new permanent 5% rate on homes over £1m.

The chancellor said that lower-than-expected unemployment figures meant that he could extend the guarantee of a job or training place for all 18- to 24-year-olds for an additional 12 months to March 2012.

The inheritance tax threshold would be frozen at £350,000 for four years – the Tories plan to scrap the levy on estates under £1m – to help pay for care for the elderly, he told MPs.

At the same time the chancellor sought to reassure the markets about his commitment to tackling Britain's record deficit, with a further £9bn in savings on top of £11bn of efficiency measures by 2012-13 in December's pre-budget report.

Darling said on GMTV: "If we took public spending away now we'd risk tipping the country back into recession. That is not a risk I'm willing to take."

The huge deficit is largely the result of the unprecedented cost of bailing out the banks, much of which may eventually return to the public purse when the nationalised banks are privatised again.

Whitehall departments announced their contributions towards the £11bn savings – many of them previously announced – including £4.35bn from the Department of Health and the NHS, £1.1bn from the Department for Children and £700m from the Ministry of Defence.

But the proposed savings – to come largely from back-office functions such as IT, procurement, consultants and administration, or by cutting costs such as staff sickness and energy bills – were ridiculed by opposition politicians who said they were too vague to be credible.

Sign up for the Guardian Today

Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.